Justin noted that “after initially waiving their right to respond, but then being specifically asked by the Supreme Court to file a response, some of those same plaintiffs’ attorneys [in Bais Yaakov] filed an opposition to the petition for certiorari [in PDR], making similar arguments to those made in Bais Yaakov — that courts should not use [Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.] to sidestep agency interpretations of the regulations they are asked to implement.”

Justin also addressed the challenge for the FCC in addressing the specific question presented: “On the one hand, Chairman Pai has stated repeatedly — and specifically in the context of Bais Yaakov and TCPA fax regulations — that the FCC under his watch will ‘strive to follow the law and exercise only the authority that has been granted to [it] by Congress.’” “But on the other hand, it is not hard to imagine Chairman Pai and the FCC pushing back on the ability of district courts to side-step the FCC’s interpretations using Chevron.”